Re: GR: Alternative editorial changes to the SC
On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 01:55:17AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 09:59:36AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > On 2004-04-16 04:32:57 +0100 Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> wrote:
> > >On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 09:19:39AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > >>Even if not "decided" unanimously, the "jury" doesn't seem to be in
> > >>much doubt on it
> > >where's the GR and the vote? hasn't happened. where's the policy
> > >decision?
>
> The policy decision's at http://people.debian.org/~ajt/sarge_rc_policy.txt:
>
> ] Code in main and contrib must meet the DFSG, both in .debs and
> ] in the source (including the .orig.tar.gz)
> ]
> ] Documentation in main and contrib must be freely distributable,
> ] and wherever possible should be under a DFSG-free license. This
> ] will likely become a requirement post-sarge.
>
> That'll likely have to be amended somewhat to reflect the discussions about
> firmware.
Huh ? Does this mean that we can move the ocaml-docs package to main
again ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: